By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Azzanation on 29 April 2023
Edit Thread
BasilZero said:
Signalstar said:

Yes we do.

More competition is good.

This.

Not their problem.

JWeinCom said:

The question in the title asks do "we", presumably being gamers, need Microsoft. People respond with the benefits that Microsoft being in the industry has for gamers. Then they are told that Microsoft shouldn't care about any of those things.

You have conflated two questions.

1) Do gamers benefit from Microsoft being in the industry?
2) Should Microsoft, in its own best interest, stay in the gaming industry?

And when people answer the first one, you criticize them for not answering the second. Kind of unfair. And I don't think reading the OP would really help clarify that.

So, to answer them separately.

1) Yes. Competition, generally, is good for the industry. Microsoft funding Halo led to kind of an explosion in first person shooters, with GOW doing the same for third. Microsoft's XBox Live pushed Sony to better their online service, and Gamepass pushed Sony to offer a similar service which I think is a pretty good one.

2) That's really up to Microsoft. I think they see their presence in the console space as a means of getting more people into their services. For instance, get people playing on XBox Live, and even if they don't stick with consoles, they might keep on in that ecosystem. Or get them started on Gamepass and even if they don't continue on console, they will follow the service to where it goes next. For something like Gamepass, a large part of the potential market is on consoles, and I don't think that kind of product can be successful without a console presence, at least for now.

Whatever the case may be, it seems Microsoft thinks it's worth investing in. I would say that their internal teams have more data on this than you or me, so I would generally defer to them. They see a benefit here either because their current level of success is good enough to make profits in the console space, or because it leads to greater profits elsewhere.

So, that's an answer to the two separate questions you are actually asking.

It was never about the 1st point. This thread isn't about feelings and emotions of gamers. Its about if a Company sees the need to stay in the industry. I am speaking business terms not feelings.

The moment people on this site and elsewhere understand that it's not MS's problem to keep a company they don't trust in check, is not up to MS to bleed billions. The quicker we can move on from that narrative the quicker they can understand the real world.

Soundwave said:

Who says anyone else would automatically enter the market? No one can be in this business unless they are willing to spend a few billion dollars that's just the reality of the market. 

You assume if Microsoft leaves that it's gaurunteed someone else would enter to ensure there is direct competition for Sony. I don't think that's a given at all, your whole premise even betrays that point ... who is itching to get into the industry knowing that it was bleeding MS for a bunch of a cash too. That's not very appealing for anyone. 

No one is saying that's a guarantee, and that's the point. Who will? Why should MS? No one wants to eat the costs of billions on hardware unless you are market leader or Nintendo. 

If it's not appealing to anyone than its not appealing to MS. You answered your own concerns with your own posts.

This isn't about your feelings and trust, this is about weather MS wants to continue losing money on hardware when they can just rely on Sony and Nintendo. If Sony decide to screw up well that's on those who support Sony. Again not MS problem.

Manlytears said:

Not MS's problem to keep PS in check. 

you didn't read that the second part of what I wrote. I'll summarize:

Microsoft needs to prove that the Xbox is a platform of equal or greater value than Playstation/Nintendo, otherwise it will always be at a disadvantage. They will not be able to do this by being a third party, on the contrary, if they distribute games through the Playstation/Nintendo they will only contribute to strengthening the fame, reputation and mindshare of rivals in detriment of the Xbox brand.
In the "future" where Cloud Gaming is the main form of distribution, Google, Amazon (or other big tech) can partner/buy Playstation or Nintendo and surpass a "Weak Xbox". Microsoft shouldn't take that risk, they need to strengthen the Xbox brand and make it stand out, leaving the console business as a "loser" is a mistake.

So yeah.... putting PS in check, and making Xbox strong is MS's problem.

Completely wrong. MS being a 3rd party publisher means they will benefit from more Nintendo and Sony sales without spending billions on hardware. Games like Starfield and Halo will only sell more. MS has the foundation for the future of cloud, they own their own network, Sony will be the ones struggling when gaming moves onto servers which Sony will have to rely on MS, Amazon, Google and Apple etc. Unless Sony invest $30b+ on creating their own cloud network which is unlikely for a niche market like console gaming.

KLAMarine said:

Yes. Helps keep PlayStation honest.

Not MS problem to keep Sony in check. 

Last edited by Azzanation - on 29 April 2023